By Patrick Washington | The Dallas Weekly
DALLAS — Rev. Dr. Frederick D. Haynes III has spent decades challenging political power from the pulpit. Now, as a candidate for Texas’ 30th Congressional District, the longtime Dallas pastor says he wants to take that fight directly to Congress, where he believes legislative action can address the economic and social inequalities affecting millions of Americans.
In an interview with The Dallas Weekly, Haynes outlined an ambitious congressional agenda centered on economic justice, immigration reform, government accountability and protecting civil rights. He also offered pointed criticism of the Trump administration and white Christian nationalism, arguing that the country faces a pivotal moment requiring more than political rhetoric.
For Haynes, the transition from ministry to electoral politics represents an extension of his life’s work rather than a departure from it.
“Public policy is so personal,” Haynes said, recalling the environmental crisis surrounding Shingle Mountain in southern Dallas, where a massive pile of discarded roofing shingles exposed nearby residents to environmental hazards.
Haynes described a member of his congregation who developed lung problems after living near the site. While his ministry offered prayer and advocacy, he said the experience demonstrated the limits of those efforts without legislative authority.
“We not only fought and prayed for her and fought to remove the shingles, but we also had to fight to change public policy,” he said.
He pointed to former U.S. Rep. Adam Clayton Powell Jr., who also served as pastor of Harlem’s Abyssinian Baptist Church, as an example of religious leadership translated into legislative influence.
For Haynes, Congress offers the opportunity to change the policies that determine whether communities can afford housing, access economic opportunity and protect themselves from discrimination.
Beyond the Minimum Wage: Addressing Dallas’ Affordability Crisis
One of Haynes’ central economic proposals is replacing the traditional minimum-wage debate with what he calls a “true cost-of-living wage,” a framework intended to account for differences in living expenses between communities.
He argues that proposals for a $20 hourly minimum wage, while an improvement over the federal minimum of $7.25, fail to reflect the financial realities facing Dallas residents.
“$20 an hour is no money in Dallas,” Haynes said.
He explained that a uniform national wage standard does not adequately recognize the differences in housing and living expenses between cities such as Dallas and Midland.
Haynes said he wants Congress to consider policies that tie wage standards more closely to the actual costs families face in their communities.
His economic agenda also includes protections for longtime residents of neighborhoods experiencing new investment and rising property values.
Asked how federal policies could encourage development without accelerating displacement, Haynes proposed property-tax protections for existing homeowners.
“As property values go up, that we see a freeze on property taxes for the traditional residents of the area,” he said, explaining that such protections could allow families to remain in neighborhoods undergoing economic transformation.
He referenced redevelopment discussions surrounding Redbird Mall as an example of the importance of ensuring that existing residents benefit from investment.
Haynes also emphasized that economic justice cannot be separated from racial justice.
“I have no problem with bringing racial justice as a component to economic justice,” he said.
He argued that historically discriminatory policies, including unequal access to New Deal-era programs and veterans’ benefits, demonstrate why broadly written economic legislation may still leave marginalized communities behind.
Without targeted protections, he warned, new investments and economic programs risk reproducing longstanding inequalities.
Immigration: Haynes Calls for Abolishing ICE
Haynes delivered one of his strongest policy statements when asked about immigration enforcement, border security and the protection of immigrant families.
“We need to abolish ICE. ICE has become the new KKK,” Haynes said, referring to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
He argued that the agency’s enforcement practices have created fear in immigrant communities and that reforming its existing structure would be insufficient.
“You do not tweak a system. You do not tweak a pattern. You have to basically undo it and redo it,” he said.
Beyond abolishing ICE, Haynes called for comprehensive immigration reform that establishes a nondiscriminatory pathway to citizenship.
He also connected immigration to American foreign policy, arguing that U.S. intervention and economic exploitation have contributed to instability in countries whose residents subsequently seek refuge in the United States.
Haynes advocated what he described as a “moral foreign policy,” drawing on the teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to argue that the United States should prioritize international goodwill, economic development and humanitarian investment.
He questioned the consistency of American immigration policy, particularly the treatment of migrants from different racial and national backgrounds.
Haynes said immigration reform must recognize the nation’s responsibility toward people displaced by persecution, instability and economic hardship.
Congressional Oversight and the Possibility of Impeachment
Haynes was equally forceful when discussing the role Congress should play in checking presidential authority.
Asked what measures he would support to address alleged corruption, conflicts of interest and executive overreach under President Donald Trump, Haynes argued that Congress has failed to exercise its constitutional responsibilities.
“The responsibility of Congress is to serve not as the doormat for the president, but instead to provide guardrails,” he said.
Haynes called for congressional investigations and hearings into potential wrongdoing by the administration if Democrats gain control of Congress.
He also expressed support for legislative action limiting executive overreach and restoring government functions he believes have been weakened.
While acknowledging that rebuilding federal institutions would require time, funding and strategic planning, Haynes suggested the country could be approaching an opportunity for what he described as a “third reconstruction.”
The candidate also made clear that he would not rule out impeachment proceedings.
“I am not taking impeachment off the table. If you break the law, you should have to face the consequences,” he said.
His comments reflected a broader argument that the nation’s system of checks and balances must be actively enforced rather than simply assumed to function.
Haynes accused the administration of undermining democratic institutions and using federal authority against political opponents. Those allegations were presented as his assessment of the administration, rather than findings established during the interview.
Confronting White Christian Nationalism
As a prominent religious leader seeking federal office, Haynes occupies an unusual position in the debate over the relationship between Christianity and American political power.
Asked how he would confront white Christian nationalism while protecting constitutional religious freedoms, Haynes distinguished between an individual’s right to hold extremist beliefs and the government’s responsibility to prevent those beliefs from infringing on the rights of others.
He said that, while he strongly opposes racist and discriminatory religious ideologies, he would defend the constitutional rights of those who espouse them.
However, he argued that religious freedom does not authorize discrimination or political domination.
“White Christian nationalism is so much more white than it ever will be Christian,” Haynes said.
He criticized what he described as the historical construction of a white image of Jesus used to justify slavery, colonialism and racial oppression.
Haynes argued that contemporary Christian nationalism represents a continuation of those traditions rather than an entirely new political movement.
He also invoked biblical teachings emphasizing justice, mercy and faith, arguing that religious institutions must be judged by how they treat vulnerable communities.
“If you ain’t about justice, you ain’t about Jesus,” he said.
Haynes said he intends to use the visibility of congressional office to challenge religious extremism while defending the First Amendment rights of all Americans.
From the Pulpit to Public Policy
Throughout the interview, Haynes returned to a central theme: the relationship between public policy and everyday life.
Whether discussing environmental injustice, housing affordability, immigration enforcement or federal accountability, he argued that political decisions have direct consequences for communities historically excluded from economic and political power.
His campaign message combines traditional civil rights advocacy with a more expansive vision of federal economic intervention and institutional reform.
But moving from advocacy to legislation would present significant challenges. Proposals such as restructuring federal immigration enforcement, establishing new wage standards and strengthening congressional oversight would require legislative support, political negotiation and, in some cases, cooperation across different levels of government.
Haynes acknowledged the difficulty of rebuilding institutions and policies he believes have been weakened.
“It doesn’t take a lot to demolish in terms of time, but to reconstruct, to rebuild, it takes what? An architect with drawings. You’ve got to finance it. You’ve got to have the material,” he said.
For Haynes, the opportunity to serve in Congress is ultimately about translating decades of ministry and activism into the authority to shape public policy.
His candidacy presents District 30 voters with a choice about the kind of representation they want in Washington: a continuation of outspoken civil rights advocacy, coupled with an agenda that seeks to turn those principles into federal legislation.
As the campaign progresses, the central question will be how Haynes intends to transform those ambitions into achievable legislative priorities.
This article is based on an October 23, 2026, interview conducted by Patrick Washington for The Dallas Weekly.
